This is the real story - Monsanto interfering with our ability to find out what is safe.
I'm not sure why you're singling out Monsanto, to the exclusion of the government meddling.
Given the statement
a senior official at the Environmental Protection Agency had worked to quash a review
Shouldn't we be pointing a finger at the EPA - even more so, because it's their duty to protect us?
We should all be watchdogs, pointing out malfeasance. But it can't stop when we discover a corporation doing wrong, especially when the implication of that finding is that the government needs more power to keep us safe - when part of the problem is malfeasance in the government itself.
Who was the senior official? What was the purpose in them squashing it? Was there a conflict of interest? This raises many more questions than "shouldn't we be pointing a finger at the EPA?"
I want to know why this was squashed and what interest this senior official had in squashing it.
> I'm not sure why you're singling out Monsanto, to the exclusion of the government meddling.
I'm sure you meant "to the exclusion of the [lack of] government meddling, [quashed on behalf of and directly coordinated with Monsanto by a public official.]"
First, the OP doesn't say anything about "on behalf of and directly coordinated with".
Second, my intent is to point out the futility of vesting greater in public agencies to handle problems arising (in part) from malfeasance in public agencies.
It seems like the old adage about digging deeper to get out of the hole you're in. I'll grant that there may be ways to finesse this, with proper checks and balances. But it would certainly be an exception to see a proposal that tries to create such interlocking responsibilities, rather than just casting Public Choice economics to the wind.
I'm not sure why you're singling out Monsanto, to the exclusion of the government meddling.
Given the statement
a senior official at the Environmental Protection Agency had worked to quash a review
Shouldn't we be pointing a finger at the EPA - even more so, because it's their duty to protect us?
We should all be watchdogs, pointing out malfeasance. But it can't stop when we discover a corporation doing wrong, especially when the implication of that finding is that the government needs more power to keep us safe - when part of the problem is malfeasance in the government itself.